Reconsidering oversight of Salisbury’s water, wetlands

The inland/wetlands panel is expected to vote on the rules change on March 24.

SALISBURY — Nearly five years ago an attempt by the town’s Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission to expand the scope of Upland Review Areas around water and wetlands from 75 feet to 200 feet revealed a deep divide, sparked by intense opposition from some property owners around Lake Wononscopomuc and the Twin Lakes in the northern edge of Salisbury.

The commission had left each of the town’s four regulated, named lakes’ upland review areas at the current 75 feet from the lake shore. That panel has now asked each lake association to determine if a modification of the Upland Review Area is warranted for their particular lakes.

The request acknowledges that shorelines have significantly different topographies, including lot sizes, and that review areas for each lake need not be uniform.

The Twin Lakes Association’s board has settled on a 100 foot review area, representing an increase from 75 feet but scaled back from the 300 feet proposed earlier. The Lake Wononscopomuc Association remains in favor of a 200-foot area, according to the presidents of their respective lake groups.

The inland/wetlands panel is expected to vote on the rules change on March 24. If approved, the proposal will be forwarded to the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection for comment, and a public hearing is set for May 12.

“The Lake Wononscopomuc Association initiated this review four years ago when we asked the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission to extend the upland review area to 200 feet,” said William Littauer, that association’s president.

Littauer noted that members were concerned about tree removal above the current 75-foot upland review area. “The destruction of vegetation so close to the lake would remove barriers to the flow of nutrients into the water column,” Littauer said, noting that there has been some discussion since then that 300 feet would be better and match the 300-foot Lake Overlay Protection District.

“However, that is not a unanimous position,” said Littauer. “So our position remains in favor of a 200-foot URA with the permitted activities outlined in the draft language.”

Grant Bogle, president of the Twin Lakes Association, said his group’s proposal for a 100 foot Upland Review Area has also been endorsed by representatives of the Salisbury Lakefront Homeowners Group, the primary organization that in the past opposed a broader review area.

The IWWC proposal and more association business will be discussed in a Zoom town hall the evening of April 30, Bogle said, who noted that members will also have the opportunity to express their views at public hearings.

“Given that we have looked at this issue over many years, and in conjunction with the ongoing watershed study being conducted by HVA, we felt bringing the Upland Review Area in line with the state recommended distance of 100 feet made sense,” Bogle said.

The Twin Lakes Association board’s support is contingent on the commission formalizing a proposed list of homeowner activities that would not require review, such as lawn maintenance, care for shrubs and trees and other activities associated with daily living, including gardening.

According to its March 13 newsletter, the TLA board settled on 100 feet for three main reasons: Many lots on the lakes are so small that 300 feet would encompass the entire property; state scientists have found that beyond 100 feet, landscaping and other activities likely have little or no impact on water quality or erosion and the state recommends a 100-foot review area in most cases. Also, waterfront property owners are already subject to a 300-foot overlay protection zone requiring Planning and Zoning approval for any earth-moving projects including construction and septic system replacement.